Read this 1st It pretty much covers everything. One big key point many folks forget is, Location
This is something that is often overlooked to the headache and frustration of many would be miners. These machines are loud and hot. You essentially have an electric heater that also uses an industrial fan to keep it from melting itself. This space will need to have the electrical requirements as discussed previously.
So make sure you have a space that is well ventilated with a plan to exhaust heat, and bring in fresh dust free air. I say this as using AC to cool the room will eat into your profits and may even make mining unprofitable. The noise issue is a consideration you can sort out depending on whats available. (garage, basement, remote building) Since you said you are getting a pre-owned miner you need to do a few things to make sure it has not been infected with malware: Download a fresh copy of the miner firmware from the manufacturer's website Load it into the miner How to do that all depends on who makes the miner and what model it is. There are lots of posts in the Forum about how to do it, just look at posts dealing with your miner.
|
|
|
|
|
Get a BTC wallet, either using an online web wallet or a hardware wallet like either one from Trezor or Leger.
Use it to create a receiving address.
Buy an ASIC-based miner, plug it in and point it at a pool setup to use your receiving address...
Mine.
|
|
|
|
All Canaan firmware is located at https://download.canaan-creative.com/Look at the labels on the side of the miner to see what it should be then connect just the 1 that does not work to a controller and look at the GUI to see what it says under 'DEVICE". If it is blank or does not match what the label on miner says you will need to apply the correct MM firmware to the miner. You may also have to load a matching OpenWrT onto the controller as well. No matter what, the different Avalon's need to be on different controllers. |
|
|
|
|
The different Avalon models MUST be on their own controller!
The reason is simple: The different models all have different command values and more importantly different firmware. When upgrading the MM firmware the update would be applied to all miners attached to the controller which would be a bad thing because the 851's or 852's would think they are now a different model.
|
|
|
|
|
Also be aware that many browsers such as FireFox either by default browser-based block crypto mining or have plugins available to block mining (that everyone should use) because of the aforementioned performance hits.
|
|
|
|
Ja, gotta say that you and your partners found each other at the perfect time  1. A industrial park developer/owner had a sweet deal with the power company due to a very heavy energy user (ice cream company) being there. Thing was, the deal had terms based on a minimum service power usage. Ice cream company left along with the huge freezers power load, as a result the developer has a problem. 2. You work with Buysolar and somehow you two connected with #1. 3. Perfect deal: Developer has a minimum power to use commitment - and a pre-existing record of power usage, they know about Bitcoin, you say something like, "Well, mining takes a lot of power but not too much space, you have warehouses with a lot of rooftop space and I know Buysolar so howzabout...." 4. Gear with decent efficiency was available at decent prices.  |
|
|
|
...
But now that he has all that electricity, why not just sell it to the grid? I know that those that have solar panels can do that if the panels generated more electricity than the owner used. At least in the US each state has a Public Utilities Commissions that put limits on your self-generation capacity and what you can do with it. They work with the actual Public Utility (PU) providers who own and run "The Grid(s)" in that state to properly govern the grid(s) in the state. That's why. Most PU's will require that you have a proven x amount of power usage over several months and then limit your solar/wind/water/whatnot generation capacity to that value + some reserve margin over it. The reason for that is simple: The PU's are required by law to do their practical best at providing reliable power to the areas they serve. Amongst other things that means having a good idea of how much reliable power is available on 'the Grid' and how much is being used. They cannot have a huge number of folks acting as an independent outside power source because said folks have little to no incentive to guarantee the quality and amount of power they are feeding into the grid. That said -- if you are talking about generating a few MW or more of power that is different story. Anyone can setup a private (or is often the case, local community owned) power generation site, become regulated service provider, and tie it to the grid. Especially in rural areas it is fairly common. As I recall, in Michigan the generation capacity threshold to become a service provider is a minimum designed constant capacity of 500kW with at least that amount going to feed the grid. To do that the site has to meet many regulatory points one being that it must be built to meet all requirements of the Regional Grid Operations Authority (the US has 3 - the Eastern Grid, the Western Grid and the Texas (ERCOT) Grid, with the Eastern Grid being the largest of the three) as well as be operated per their requirements. OK, then what stops the big utilities from using their electricity to mine as opposed to selling it to the consumer? Really?  They are PUBLIC UTILITIES - not a business. They were created to serve the greater good by providing reliable power to the areas they serve and are bound by law for that to be their primary purpose. But - when it comes to excess power generation and/or normally idling reserve capacity built for handling peak loads they are free to do what they want with it. Some utilities DO use miners located at and fed by their peak-power leveling generation sites to set a heavy baseline load for easier and more efficient site operations. They then start shedding miners as the reserve capacity is called upon during time of peak loads. Once the loads drop off miners are brought back online to keep the plants operational loads fairly constant. |
|
|
|
|
Not a joke. In general, clean water will NOT harm a miner - or for that matter most other electronic devices: PROVIDED THEY ARE ALLOWED TO THOROUGHLY DRY OUT BEFORE APPLYING POWER AND TURNING THEM ON. Water mixed with other cleaners is used in many areas of electronic device manufacturing. Using soap is fine as well but the concern there is that the boards must be very well rinsed off to remove any remaining traces of it. A final rinse with IPA to help drive out moisture before drying would be a good idea as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Use Imgur to post images. If you do not have the original image, take a screen shot and post it to Imgur then post the generated link here.
This Forum only accepts images from trusted sites such as Imgur and a few others like it.
|
|
|
|
|
Take a screenshot and post it on Imgur.
That will also cut down on the sites click count.
|
|
|
|
|
Feel about it?
Considering they are promoting anti-vaccination crap, both the sellers of them and those who buy them are idiots. Hopefully they have not had a chance to breed and with any luck, Darwin will step in and remove them from this mortal coil.
Yep. That's my feelings in a nutshell.
|
|
|
|
Imagine that ASIC manufacturers have found a parallel application for their devices, which is in demand by millions of consumers, and not by tens of thousands of miners.
The idea would have gained more interest. There is nothing to imagine. Has someone forgotten what the 'AS' part of ASIC stands for? Application Specific. The chips can only do 1 thing - process hashes. Now perhaps someone can come up with a different purpose other than validation that the results of matching a hash can be used for but the mfgrs have nothing to do with that part of the equation. Ah I see! You mean like what if instead of making circuits that are application specific to Bitcoin mining, they would make processing units that could also be used for, let's say, graphics? 🤔 Such as a RISC processor or GPU? What a ground breaking idea...  |
|
|
|
However it is also a fact that most (but not all) of the folks behind the myriad of altcoins DO NOT think that they have ANY fiduciary responsibilities and as such act only in their self-interest (can you say shitcoin pump-n-dump schemes?). It is because of those crypto coin developers acting irresponsibly and all too often, fraudulently, that she has concerns which may need to be addressed through legislation.
But what it would mean in reality? That developers must comply with regulations before releasing open-source software? I don't see how this can be enforced, especially since crypto is a global phenomenon that ignores borders. Best they can do is to tell exchanges which coins to list, but we're already in era of decentralized exchanges, so even that won't prevent people from investng in scamcoins. To me it is not so much the actual software used be it Core or some bastardized mutation of it tweaked for an altcoin -- it is what coin/token/whatnot the software is applied to and who in turn are the operators of the BUSINESS behind said coins. What is the business model? What is the point of the coin? How is the tweaked code for it maintained (and by who/how?) Being the forerunners that gave birth to the crypto currency revolution, BTC and a few alts such as Litecoin and ETH were lucky enough to skate under those regulatory questions and have been ran openly enough, well enough, and long enough to gain the wide acceptance and for the most part at least quasi-legal status they currently enjoy. The disgusting afterbirth of ICO's/tokens/etc - and the scammy pump-n-dump nature of the vast majority of them - has now brought the need for regulation. As Binance and other exchanges have found out when they also opened up trading platforms, they are securities and as such now are treated and regulated for what they are - securities investments. |
|
|
|
You left out KanoPool. Definitely the best as far as being reliable and best run. Only drawback is its current small size resulting it being just over 1 year since our last block. That said, pegged on our size the current block diff (the proverbial 'Luck') is 283.61% |
|
|
|
At one point the lady Ms. Walsh hints that governments should go after code committers. No, she does not 'hint at' much less say that. If you read her testimony before the senate, she does say that the developers need to realize that they have fiduciary responsibilities in that they must be acting for the greater good of those who use their code to create and use crypto coins. To me that is a very valid point and in my opinion the devs behind Bitcoin Core do that. She says (emphasis mine) In my view, the governance of crypto systems is critical to understand – who has power, how may it be exercised, and what are the limits of power? Since crypto systems emerged with Bitcoin, a dominant thread of the conversation about them has been that they are “decentralized,” and therefore lack sites of meaningful power. You may have heard that in crypto systems, you don’t have to trust humans and their fallible, corrupt natures – you just have to trust math. If I have one message for the Committee today, it is that this statement is just inaccurate.
Cryptoeconomic systems remain subject to human flaws and corruption, whether in how the software is coded, whether the game theory designed to operate the system is robust, or whether miners collude to exploit their power to order transactions in the blockchain record to their benefit. Since Bitcoin’s 2009 launch, events across the crypto ecosystem have demonstrated time and again that parties within crypto systems (not just those intermediaries outside the systems like exchanges or wallet providers) exercise meaningful power.
In short, it is also a fact that most (but not all) of the folks behind the myriad of altcoins DO NOT feel that they have ANY fiduciary responsibilities and as such act only in their self-interest (can you say shitcoin pump-n-dump schemes?). It is because of those crypto coin developers acting irresponsibly and all too often, fraudulently, that she has concerns which may need to be addressed through legislation. Overall I found her testimony to be refreshingly fair and neutral, both acknowledging what crypto can bring to the table as a useful currency tool while also being fully aware of possible negative aspects that would be detrimental to its use. Not once did she even hint at the usual 'bad/illegal uses' boogeymen that the media love to jump on for eyeball or click bait. Kudos to her for that!  |
|
|
|
...
I wouldn't put too much faith in gold, it'll probably be worthless very soon. It may be a shiny metal, but there are other metals that are far more useful, like: copper, aluminum, iron, tin, nickel, magnesium, tungsten, among others.
Gold can easily be dissolved (yet another way it can go to zero) by red fuming nitric acid, aka Aqua regia. This cannot be done to a bitcoin. It is not currently possible to dissolve a bitcoin with any known acid, this alone gives it greater value. So much sooo wrong here.... Gold is irreplaceable for interconnecting components with many many applications in electronic devices. If there were other more viable metals to be used in place of it manufacturers would NOT be using expensive gold. Regarding "Gold can easily be dissolved", no, it cannot. To quote the Wikipedia article on it, "Gold is unaffected by most acids. It does not react with hydrofluoric, hydrochloric, hydrobromic, hydriodic, sulfuric, or nitric acid. It does react with selenic acid, and is dissolved by aqua regia, a 1:3 mixture of nitric acid and hydrochloric acid. Nitric acid oxidizes the metal to +3 ions, but only in minute amounts, typically undetectable in the pure acid because of the chemical equilibrium of the reaction". The statement about It is not currently possible to dissolve a bitcoin with any known acid is utterly pointless given that Bitcoin is not a physical thing All that out of the way, personally I'll take Bitcoin as an asset over gold any day. Precious metals have their place as an investment medium but do not have the growth potential that crypto has. |
|
|
|
cpuminer Wrong. If you had bothered to read the start of this VERY short thread you would know that for many years now, BTC mining with a PC is beyond useless. |
|
|
|
Also I don't think it's sustainable to run an s19 Pro at 195TH/s by adding a second PSU, you might just end up burning the chips or something - even if it did work for a few days which I think is unlikely. As long as they are immersion cooled the miners will probably be fine IF the PSU's are: a) programmable b) able to be ran in n+1 (parallel) configuration or at a minimum the hash boards are individually powered ie 1 board, 1 PSU. If they are air cooled - terrible idea! |
|
|
|
|
The S19 - and ALL miners using a built-in PSU - use custom PSU's that cannot just be replaced with a different one. These miners use a programmable PSU that the controller talks to for setting the chip string voltage vs using a fixed 12VDC supply followed by on-board 2nd stage DC-DC regulators.
PSU voltages can now range from 15-21VDC depending on make/model of miner and the miner settings.
|
|
|
|
I have faced the same issue and clearly have no idea why it occurs in the first place. Maybe the miner’s version is pretty old. I’ll try to upgrade mine and see it still occurs or not If you are talking about losing all chips on a board from the 2nd stage DC-DC regulator failing, firmware version is irrelevant. With gear that has been resold, odds are the previous owner(s) over-clocked the hell out of them before reselling them. To put it mildly that is very hard on the miner and drastically shortens the life of hardware that is often not that well built to begin with... |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
